travelinman67 wrote:Wrong again, Hippie.Chizzang wrote:Um...
has ANYBODY who posted on this thread actually read the UN report that T-mans article is referencing...?
The article related to the UN report is extremely misleading
It's simply a UN report on sustainable practices in food production and consumption... and that's all it is
nothing about taking peoples steaks away
![]()
"Summary And Conclusions"
Section 5.4
Page 74Figure 5.7: Ranked contribution of produced goods to total environmental impacts
"Integrated Conclusions And Future Outlook"
Section 6.6.1
Page 80Section 6.6.2Animal products, both meat and dairy, in general require more resources and cause higher emissions than plant-based alternatives.
Page 82Try adding some protein to your diet, Alinsky...Impacts from agriculture are expected to increase substantially due to population growth, increasing consumption of animal products. Unlike fossil fuels, it is difficult to look for alternatives: people have to eat. A substantial reduction of impacts would only be possible with a substantial worldwide diet change, away from animal products.![]()
This is just more New World Order social engineering. Shame on you for defending these cretins.
It's a "study" of sustainability... that's all
why do you make everything into some kind of an attack - it's just data - nothing is going to happen
you're a hyper-paranoid freak dude... get off the brain candy and exhale a little bit
When I did research for Rand we were constantly putting together portfolios on a multitude of crap like this
seriously... you need to relax a little bit - you're coming across like Glen Beck on cocaine
Next you'll start crying and reciting the sermon on the mount and telling us all to drink some coolaid you just made
It'll be okay honey try to get some rest




